- This topic has 13 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Which ideology will be around longer?
Zionism will be gone. Together with the other isms – communism, socialism, nationalism, etc. And together with the reform and conservative.
Both will be around till moshiach comes.
Satmar is a continuation of traditional Jewish ideology going back to Sinai. It will survive.
Zionism is a spinoff of European nationalism and is dying. It’s basic idea, the establishing of a secular “Torah-free” (their words, not mine) Jewish homeland have been rejected by most people who call themselves zionists. Most Israelis have rejected either the idea of a Jewish homeland, or the idea of secular nationalism. The post-zionists will eventually assimilate into Euro-American culture. The religious ones will eventually decide that Torah is more important than political structure. Over time, zionism will be in the dustbin of Jewish history along with the Misyavanim or the supports of Shabatai Zvi and the Frankists and the “Reform movement.”
Whose Zionism are you talking about, religious or not? What is Eretz Tzion if not religious Zionism based on the Torah. The Land of Israel is Tzion.
It should be obvious to every Jews by now that Israel could not have survived and thrived without Hashem. So while it isn’t ideal yet, Israel’s creation and existence can only be Min Hashamayim. Only the hard core, cult like among us can’t recognize reality after all this time and are so ingrained in their position that they won’t even consider what is right before their noses.
From day one, all the occurrences that initiated lead to the Geulah Shlayma have the appearance of being not kosher, i.e., Yehuda and Tamar, Boaz and Rus, Dovid HaMelech and Batsheva. There is a reason Hashem did things this way, so as to fool the Sitra Achra, who was given certain powers to dissuade us from acting as we should and doesn’t want the Geulah.
So, why is the founding of the State of Israel any different. Any soldier, Frum or not, can tell you all the Nissim that happened to them. Even military leaders in West Point, after analyzing Israeli wars say that they can’t explain it that militarily, we should have lost. Hashem is watching over us.
I refer you all to an exceedingly well know Posuk in Yeshayohu, Perek 2, Posuk 3:- “Ki MiZion Tetzei Toroh uDevar haShem m’Yerusholayim” a verse recited at least once every 3 days, being recited at every single Hotzo’as haToroh.
Now we all know that Toroh will endure & outlast everything else, and since Toroh emanates from Zion & not from St. Mary. So clearly the ideology of Zionism as per this Posuk shall be around far longer than the ideology of Satmar.
BarryLS1:
Rav Elchonon Wasserman answered your question well before Israel even came into existence (but long after Zionism has begun to shmad our people). He noted that Zionism is Avoda Zara while “Religious Zionism” is simply Religion mixed into Avoda Zara.
Your wrote: “It should be obvious to every Jews by now that Israel could not have survived and thrived without Hashem”. Similarly, and not to compare the two, one could at least as easily point out the same, but with one small change: “It should be obvious to every Jews by now that Hitler YM”S could not have survived and thrived without Hashem.”
The flaw in that logic is thus quite clear: what Hashem allows to happen is not at all necessarily what He “wants” to happen.
Further, as you wrote, “only the hard-core cult-like among us can’t recognize reality after all this time…” but should have continued with something like: and fail to see the how Zionism and the State of Israel (despite the Yeshivos, etc.) are the anti-thesis of Judaism and certainly not the ratzon Hashem as it is explicitly forbidden for Jews to have a State before Mashiach, the shmad, human sacrifices, etc.
Nissim mean nothing, of course, in terms of determining right or wrong. That’s straight out in the Torah: “ki minaseh Hashem eschem…” (and expounded on later).
The Brisker Rav, who lived in E”Y at the time of the State’s founding answered your last question. He noted that at that eis ratzon, had the Jews davened for the true geulah instead of the State, they would have received that. But since they asked for the State, with all its many problems, then that is what Hashem gave them, unfortunately.
The only reason Satmar has survived is because of the high birth rates. It is not usually attractive to people who were not born Satmar
silly question. zionism is already over having been replaced with the state of israel. further, while satmar certainly is centralized around the torah given at sinai, it has also adopted into its practice many new practices some of them the reforms of the chassidis movement and some of the reforms truly their own and have made these reforms part of their core beliefs. While satmar’s reforms as we know it today may not have a long future as all reforms (frankists, shabbtians, etc.) eventually die away, its core, which is judiasm, will remain forever.
147, Satmar believes in that form of Zionism as well.
Original zionism died during the first intifada. There are still a few random holdouts of the original zionism, mostly in America, but there is also one island and the vatican where latin is still a spoken language. Zionism – as per the original form that would cut off the payos of Teimani children and Holocaust survivors – died. Even the current attempt to wage war on Torah is weak and bears very little support beyond the politicians who initiated it. That’s why all the political parties suddenly feel that they need to dissociate from it – their constituents didn’t like it and felt it was unproductive.
Torah is winning, if we keep fighting it can’t be that much longer before we win entirely.
Whatever Satmar believes, the hateful comments that come from some of their members is shameful.
What is the point of this thread? This zionism vs satmar/antizionism debate keeps getting replayed over and over again in the CR. Everybody keeps making the same old points pro and con. It gets very tiring after a while.
This thread seems to have been created for the sole purpose of instigating more of the same tired old discussion. The question that started the thread is pointless – obviously, whichever view is closer to the emes will ultimately outlast the other, so really the question is just asking which point of view people think is emes, which leads back to the same futile discussion that appears in so many other threads.
Agreed.
- The topic ‘Zionism vs. Satmar’ is closed to new replies.